The New Agenda on CNN
January 23, 2009
by Sheryl Lee
|We know we’re girls and therefore genetically bad at math, but we’ve been keeping a pretty close eye on this, and can’t imagine how we missed it. According to our Cabinent Watch page, Obama has only appointed women to 5 out of 21 seats, but CNN says it’s 6 women. We feel a little silly asking, but if there’s a sixth woman out there that we don’t know about, will someone slip us a note under the table? We’d hate to look like we can’t get our facts straight.
Here’s the video from CNN today:
Note to Naomi Wolf regarding her false choice between between representation of women and desirable policies: You are implying a relationship between independent variables that does not exist. We thought you were smarter than that, and more honest, actually, but the way you frame this issue is misleading, and your conclusion is wrong. We respectfully suggest you read the UNIFEM report, “Progress of the World’s Women” — the full PDF version; not just the online shorthand.
Newsday also mentioned The New Agenda today in their story about Kirsten Gillibrand’s appointment to Senate. The piece included some truly heartening words about Gillibrand’s agenda:
[UPDATE: take Newsday's poll]
Gillibrand also said she will advocate for marriage equality and women’s rights.
Empire Pride executive director Alan Van Capele said he spoke Thursday night with Gillibrand, who expressed her support for gay marriage.
Some political experts worried Gillibrand’s conservative credentials won’t play well statewide, particularly in New York City. “She’s a Blue-dog Democrat,” said Democratic strategist Joseph Mercurio. “There’s some irony because this seat has been held by liberals such as Robert Kennedy, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Hillary Clinton.”
Still, the sophomore House member was lauded Friday by the Empire Pride Agenda, abortion rights activists and the women’s advocacy group New Agenda.
New Agenda president Amy Siskind called Gillibrand’s appointment “bold,” “sensible,” and “substantive.” She noted Gillibrand would keep the number of female U.S. senators at 17.
UPDATE — Comment from The New Agenda member, KendallJ:
Naomi continues to show how shallow her feminist perspective really is. She doesn’t seem to understand that developing sound policies that benefit women require us to have a seat at the table. Our input in developing policies that benefit us is essential. Leaving that to men has always left us with the short end of the stick, regardless of how well intentioned they are.
Furthermore, for women to get our fair share of the stimulus benefits, three things have to happen.
1.) Money has to be put into the industries where women work; hospitals, schools, etc.. and not just because women work there, but because they are important industries that focus on human capital. We need to invest in our people, not just our physical infrastructure. The Clinton administration understood this and was quiteeffective because of it.
2.) We need to invest in programming that would increase educational opportunities for women and girls in these industries that are traditionally dominated by men.
3.) We need to create incentives for employers who hire women for these jobs that are predominately held by men.
Again, Naomi could only site one of the necessary remedies for moving us forward toward economic parity. It’s funny that she accuses TNA of being funded by the right wing, when it is she who is the one always peddling half measures in the name of women’s rights, when in fact her remedies actually function to undermine real progress. Go figure!
Sheryl,
CNN should get Larry Summers to help them out. Don’t they know that girls can’t do math!
Saying that Obama should have appointed more women, perfectly reasonable demand. Saying it proves that he doesn’t take women seriously as a constituency, is in my opinion a counter-productive over-reach. It makes it look like TNA is mostly interested in putting him in a bad light instead of inspiring good policies. Like we’re already beginning the 2012 campaign against him. The young women TNA would like to bring to the cause absolutely love the guy.
I seriously think if TNA always comes off like PUMAS, we’ll only be taken as seriously as PUMAS, which is not very. Just my opinion.
Sheryl, I’m surprised at you! Being so hard on Naomi like that. She’s a girl, she can’t count. She doesn’t know how many women are in the Cabinet.
Naomi never quite recovered after the Scaife Foundation discovery. It was the find of a lifetime – figuring out in a few moments time that TNA was a far-right mole org.
I can’t imagine that she will ever be able to replicate that amazing work!
Does Naomi have ADD?
Because I have ADD, and I make the same kinds of errors she does: I draw specious connections between things and then shoot my mouth off about them before I really consider their validity. I can also become overly convinced of my own paranoid revelations, or I used to, before I learned critical thinking.
Naomi: I feel your pain, girlfriend. On a positive note, I understand that people with our, mmm, “talents” make the best spies. Perhaps a new career in espionage? Better sharpen up those investigative skills a bit first. (Okay, just read “Chapter 2: Politics”. It’s 17 pages, including graphics. Really, you’ll thank me later).
P.S. Does “Dybul” really mean “devil” in another language? Dude, that’s so trippy!
NBS (whose comment I retrieved from the moderation queue): we’re just giving Obama some tough love. As I said in another comment thread, I want him to be the best feminist he can be, and I plan to do my part to help him with that.
Seriously, though – I take your point, and our organization includes Obama supporters who are free to speak out about their support of him, but not, we hope, without being able to count or make a rational argument for their position.
Rational support of Barack Obama’s aspirations to feminism is wholeheartedly encouraged.
Amy,
Great Job!
Naomi continues to show how shallow her feminist perspective really is. She doesn’t seem to understand that developing sound policies that benefit women require us to have a seat at the table. Our input in developing policies that benefit us is essential. Leaving that to men has always left us with the short end of the stick, regardless of how well intentioned they are.
Furthermore, for women to get our fair share of the stimulus benefits, three things have to happen.
1.) Money has to be put into the industries where women work; hospitals, schools, etc.. and not just because women work there, but because they are important industries that focus on human capital. We need to invest in our people, not just our physical infrastructure. The Clinton administration understood this and was quiteeffective because of it.
2.) We need to invest in programming that would increase educational opportunities for women and girls in these industries that are traditionally dominated by men.
3.) We need to create incentives for employers who hire women for these jobs that are predominately held by men.
Again, Naomi could only site one of the necessary remedies for moving us forward toward economic parity. It’s funny that she accuses TNA of being funded by the right wing, when it is she who is the one always peddling half measures in the name of women’s rights, when in fact her remedies actually function to undermine real progress. Go figure!
Great points, KendallJ. I appended your comment to the body of the post.
Thank you Sheryl. I’m flattered!
In response to Amy Siskind’s comment on why President Obama didn’t appoint more than 5 women in his cabinet of 21. May be the reason is that there just aren’t women with the right qualifications out there. Just being a women shouldn’t give you the right to be in the cabinet. Point-in-case, Carolina Kennedy or Sarah Palin.
I’m not a PUMA and I take them seriously. PUMAs are some of the best people I’ve ever met in my life (and I’m old). They’re patriotic dissenters, respectful of a variety of ideology and political opinion within their own group (lockstep is not a requirement for inclusion), excellent researchers, and they know how to discern straight reporting from media ca-ca. they’ve been misrepresented and insulted in every conceivable way and yet they’re still there, fighting for the causes they care about. PUMAs were present and active in lobbying Governor Paterson for a woman appointee and a fair selection process.
so I don’t get it. what’s not to like about PUMAs?
Fatima, with respect, you are using a very old argument that is used very frequently to excuse the lack of women in high positions and one that is just factually incorrect. You point to two women you believe were unqualified for the positions they sought. But there were women who did not get as much press who were very highly qualified! Sexism is so often involved in the attention that certain women get over others.
You shortchange women when you suggest there aren’t any who are qualified for cabinet positions.
This is like an argument a relative of mine used to make about women not being good enough to play pro hockey. He played pro hockey, had been groomed to do so from the time he was four and his dad put him on his little skates, and made an ice rink in the back yard for him. He was in a pro hockey “farm” team at 14. Sexism begins very early.
I think one of the reasons women excel at language and words is there are no farm teams for book learning. Just pick up a book, go sit somewhere quiet with it, and get good at what women do ‘naturally’.
Fatima, you’re a guy right? Why not have the cohones to use your real name here? Most of the women do, not that they have to. But I note that few of the men do, and when they pick a ‘female’ name, it’s so hokey sexist. “Fatima”. Geez.
UN Ambassadorship is now a cabinet position and we do have a woman in that position.
http://www.theminorityreportbl.....lies_ahead
Also Penny Pritzker was nominated for the Commerce before Bill Richardson but she turned it down.
Amy Siskind had “high hopes” for Obama? When?
Sorry. You had Rice counted already. My mistake.
Maybe they are also counting Valerie Jarrett?
It is not CNN (they know how many http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI.....n.cabinet/) . It is just her.
PUMA is a group of orgs that are led by women. That is why they are not respected by the media or the blinders on, lock step, Democrats or young women who seek male approval. That does not lessen PUMAs effectiveness. I have given more money to PUMA orgs than I gave to either Hillary or McCain/Palins campaigns.
Hey wonderful ladies -
One word for our President…time! I certainly see your point, yet let’s not count out the massive amount of women already doing great things on their own in the world, such as many of you who created this amazing website! I was raised by a very independent mother who always stressed the mantra before I entered college, “get out and achieve your goals on your own” – “you don’t always need a man to create happiness for yourself, it comes from within first”. This is from a strong woman whose mother’s ancestors were slaves, and father’s ancestors were Cherokee Indians fighting struggles of their own legacy! Our president has only been in office 4 days, he is not Messiah, as several ministers have already stated, he is human, like many of us, and we have to give him a bit more time, not just 4 days in office! He’s already stated the moves will be “boldy and swiftly”, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Secy of State Hillary Clinton in high agreement, and I honestly believe him because I’ve followed his work, and know his missions in life, being a Chicago native and seeing his plans come to fruition, but Rome was not built overnight, right? As much faith as I have in God, I already know that It will happen through his administration. He didn’t spend his early life being raised single-handedly by his mother and grandmother, community organizing with law degree in hand, and the tumultous campaign trail for his mere workout benefit, he believes in what he preaches, and it will prevail! Everyone was placed in this world to achieve greatness, and with hard work and perseverance and continued belief in ourselves, it’s attainable.
Please remember…Pres. Obama has had the opportunity to view the country’s shortcomings for many, many years from being a Senator, community service organizer/leader, Bush’s 8 years of administration, and many, many other issues that catapulted his plight towards “wanting” to make “change” in the world via the White House. Being a historical President doesn’t make him immediately the end all for everything that exists in this or our world – it’s certainly a great start, yet he’s embarking upon a tremendous undertaking, and we will all work together to make things happen in our lives and the world! Believe me, he will work with us on attaining our goals in life for he is a man of mission, one who is a visionary, and goal-oriented, with an amazing First Lady who, as a Harvard graduate, is very strong-minded and strong-willed, which is only two of the reasons they chose a union together!
We as women have come so very far in our journeys, I can’t begin to count the amazing amount that have invented and reinvented themselves and their very own brand, including my mother, grandmother, friends, senators, governors, fashion designers, literary writers, executives, moms, housewives, and then there’s Oprah, who we all know have traveled quite a journey to reach her high point in life, with road blocks along the way, and she’s not done! There are many of us who are already doing great things in our own lives BEFORE President Obama entered the scene or the Oval Office. Let’s give ourselves more credit in what we represent for we ARE after all, very strong, enduring women! “What does not destroy us, makes me stronger” -Friedrich Nietzsche. And to quote from my luminous pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, Jr., who marched and was friends with the great Dr. Martin Luther and Coretta Scott King…Amen and Amen!
Blessings to all!
I love PUMA’s. It has been my experience that any group of people actually doing something useful will earn themselves all sorts of attacks and labels. They will also be constantly pushed and manipulated to give up their principles so they can “be taken seriously.” What does being “taken seriously” require? That you lay down what you are fighting for and conform.
Gillibrand has just been appointed, we’ve hardly had a chance to meet her, but already I can see that she is one of us. The media is writing the old sexists phrases usually reserved for women, “she thinks too highly of herself”, “she has self promoting ambition” and of course, “if she wishes to be taken seriously….”
Two comments:
NBS
“Saying that Obama should have appointed more women, perfectly reasonable demand. Saying it proves that he doesn’t take women seriously as a constituency, is in my opinion a counter-productive over-reach.”
Speaking as someone who did not support Obama, I agree.
——————————
Re: comment from “Fatima”. I have no idea who this person is, but that name is a woman’s name in many traditionally Muslim countries, such as Pakistan.
yttik
Missed your comment the first time around:
Gillibrand has just been appointed, we’ve hardly had a chance to meet her, but already I can see that she is one of us. The media is writing the old sexists phrases usually reserved for women, “she thinks too highly of herself”, “she has self promoting ambition” and of course, “if she wishes to be taken seriously….”
Yeah, the media wastes no time. Ugh.
To you, or anyone, who notes this kind of language, please post links so those of us who want to write letters addressing this double-standard, disrespectful way of speaking about women can do so. Thanks.
Yes. Anna. I know the origin of that name. Why, my goodness, no troll posting here would ever think of using such a name in order to get past someone’s otherwise stellar bullshit detector, would he, err, she..
“Fatima,”
Perhaps that the President can not find qualifed women because he has been searching for qualifed women with his eyes closed. We have a nation of 300 million people, so the number of women having higher degress and experience in their chosen fields is nothing to sneeze at. The Cabinet looks like America if you labor under the delusion that you are a feminist. Where did all the qualified women from the Clinton Adminstration go, since President Obama has a fondness for former Clinton operatives? Did they all die, jump into a vat of correction fluid, or fall into a black hole?
I voted for Obama and I am a women born in Afghanistan. Why should anyone get offended or emotional by anyone else’s comments in a “discussion” forum even if it comes from a male?This is the first time I feel strongly to hold my elected president accountable. I am here to learn and hopefully contribute.
Astraea and Ann, would you please add some names to your comments (thank you!):
Astraea’s comment, ” But there were women who did not get as much press who were very highly qualified!”
Ann’s comment: “Where did all the qualified women from the Clinton Adminstration go?”
Correction on my last post:
NOT Ann’s, it’s AnneE’s comment.
Instead of making sarcastic comments about Naomi, why not post a link to where/how we can contact her and other’s at her news agency to correct any errors in reporting and thinking that we feel she’s made. To my mind, that’s what an activist org does. Quips about her having ADD and the like make us sound disempowered, at least the way I hear it. If there’s disinformation out there, let’s correct it, and meanwhile, I vote for not embracing a double standard with how we treat and talk about other women. We want the media to take us at face value, on our merits, etc, so why shouldn’t we do the same in our discussions of women?
This is not a ‘quip’. I don’t know if she has ADD, but I’ll put money down she has thyroid disease, possibly Graves Disease. People who have that untreated, can exhibit paranoia. But oh forgot. Vi does slurp Ramen noodles. She admitted it.
Fatima:
This is a very tightly moderated “discussion” forum.
Sis:
“People who have that untreated, can exhibit paranoia”.
“Why, my goodness, no troll posting here would ever think of using such a name in order to get past someone’s otherwise stellar bullshit detector, would he, err, she..”
Physican, heal thyself.
[...] other crime is women who speak out and say: no, women do not need represenation in government, we just need policies . That is complete and utter hogwash! If we wait for a bunch of progressive (and some not so [...]
I don’t see the sense in griping about Obama not putting enough women in his cabinet–his being the operative word. Women had an opportunity to have a woman president, and they turned their backs on the woman candidate and voted for a man. It was so amazing to watch especially when the woman was so smart and capable, had the most experience and the best credentials for the job. I think women should just suck it up and leave the man alone now to be president. It’s crying over spilt milk and it just looks bad now. What needs to happen is for women to be less enamored by male candidates. So many women swooned and fell all over themselves for Obama. Next time vote a woman in–especially if she’s the better candidate.
Amy Siskind is right on when she states Obama doesn’t take the female constituency seriously. Thank you, Amy, for saying it right out on the airwaves. This fact has been obvious for some time. He took the female vote for granted throughout the election, barely nodding in its direction, peppering his speeches with occasional misogynistic asides, assuming women would have no place else to go (although, ironically, it was John McCain who was employing more women and paying them more than men in his campaign, and Obama was employing less women and paying them less.)
Thanks for telling it like it is, Amy.
“Sis” is correct in calling out the men who masquerade as female commenters, a common tactic on message boards, though usually preceded by “I am a woman and …blah blah blah.”
“Dee” – the “time” is NOW. Not in the future, not if we ask nice. Men have always been able to count on women backing down. Too many women’s groups fall prey to this “some other time” mentality, i.e. Womencount politely kept silent like good little girls while Obama selected his cabinet, hoping he would just do the right thing and they wouldn’t have to fight. Harder to undo what’s been done than to prevent it in the first place. Also, what do your ancestors being slaves have to do with anything? Our ancestors were slaves for thousands of years. And, women are STILL slaves globally, including in the U.S., with a thriving atrocious sex slave trade, and no civil rights in many parts of the world.
What happened to Naomi Wolf? Didn’t she used to have some legitimacy? She’s a puppet, totally unwatchable.
Lastly, we stopped watching CNN since the primaries and its outrageous biased smearing of Hillary Clinton. Not once have we watched CNN nor will we. We watched this clip to hear Amy Siskind, and see that CNN is still shifty. Obama is pro-female because he has daughters and a grandmother?? LOL. This is the same grandma he threw under the bus and called “a typical white person” which the lapdog media also glosses over. Also funny is CNN’s choice of words in addressing female concerns as “nagging.” CNN is a ridiculous useless organization.
I am not surprised one bit about Obama not supporting women. He hasn’t in the past so what makes you think he would as President? Devils advocate. John McCain paid his female staff equally and had more on staff and Obama did not — that should be a HUGE CLUE.
I would like to shake those 56% women who voted for liar Obama and say — wake up and stop voting for the D behind the name (applies to R) and look at the record. If there isn’t one — there’s a reason. Why weren’t you supporting Hillary?
I for one stopped listening to the bullshit campaign promises long ago and looked at record. Well, I must admit I did listen to Obama when his campaign accused Hillary and Bill of being racists and said she was likable enough.
Where were the women’s groups when Obama’s camp was trashing Sarah Palin? NOW and NARAL should be ashamed of themselves.
I for one don’t know which groups to trust anymore.
Obama’s hatred of women has been obvious from the getgo. We’re only seeing the consequences of the country’s mass delusion.
Where is the video montage of the 2008 sexism campaign that was posted a month or so ago? I want to send it to some people and cannot find it.
Jere,
It’s here on our Facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/topic......8158409960
Thanks Amy, I found it in the archives.
I am not navigating Facebook yet.
[...] Package (see our Media section). So maybe, just maybe, our voices have been heard. We said in our CNN interview that “Obama does not take this constituency (e.g. women) very seriously.” Maybe, just [...]
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...